Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30987435›Full record

SynthesisAmerican journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias2019

Intravenous Immunoglobulin for Patients With Alzheimer's Disease: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Apostolos Manolopoulos, Panagiotis Andreadis, Konstantinos Malandris, Ioannis Avgerinos, Thomas Karagiannis, Dimitrios Kapogiannis, Magda Tsolaki, Apostolos Tsapas, Eleni Bekiari

Open access · bronzeAbstract readMeta-AnalysisSystematic Review
PubMed Full text at PMC Publisher
In one paragraph

Synthesis in American journal of Alzheimer's disease and other dementias, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 23% of its field
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

7 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 11 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Review
  4. Gut Microbiota and Immunotherapy for Alzheimer's Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2022
    Review
  5. Review
  6. Review
  7. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

9 authors at 2 institutions in 3 countries.

Apostolos Manolopoulos1 Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID 0000-0003-1055-0324
Panagiotis Andreadis1 Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Konstantinos Malandris1 Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Ioannis Avgerinos1 Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Thomas Karagiannis1 Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Dimitrios Kapogiannis2 Laboratory of Neurosciences, Intramural Research Program, National Institute on Aging, Bethesda, MD, USA.
Magda Tsolaki3 First Department of Neurology, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, AHEPA University Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Apostolos Tsapas1 Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.ORCID 0000-0003-0221-4072
Eleni Bekiari1 Clinical Research and Evidence-Based Medicine Unit, Second Medical Department, Aristotle University of Thessaloniki, Hippokration General Hospital, Thessaloniki, Greece.
Aristotle University of Thessaloniki · GRNational Institute on Aging · US

Funding

Studies in Dementia and Neurodegenerative DiseasesZIAAG000975 · NIA · NATIONAL INSTITUTE ON AGING · PI KAPOGIANNIS, DIMITRIOS · 2009 to 2025
$31.5M
Intramural NIH HHS Z99 AG999999Intramural NIH HHS ZIA AG000975
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

aimTo assess the efficacy and safety of intravenous immunoglobulin (IVIg) for patients with Alzheimer's disease (AD). MATERIALS AND

methodsWe searched electronic databases and other sources for randomized controlled trials comparing IVIg with placebo or other treatment for adults with AD. Primary outcome was change from baseline in Alzheimer's Disease Assessment Scale-Cognitive subscale (ADAS-Cog).

resultsFive placebo-controlled trials were included in the meta-analysis. Compared to placebo, IVIg 0.2 and 0.4 g/kg once every two weeks did not change ADAS-Cog score (weighted mean difference: 0.37, 95% confidence interval: -1.46 to 2.20 and 0.77, -1.34 to 2.88, respectively). Furthermore, except for an increase in the incidence of rash, IVIg did not affect the incidence of other adverse events.

conclusionIVIg, albeit safe, is inefficacious for treatment of patients with AD. Future trials targeting earlier stages of disease or applying different dosing regimens may be warranted to clarify its therapeutic potential.

Indexed as

Randomized Controlled Trials as TopicAlzheimer DiseaseHumansImmunoglobulins, IntravenousImmunoglobulins, IntravenousAlzheimer’s diseaseIntravenous immunoglobulinmeta-analysissystematic review

Identifiers

PMID30987435
PMCPMC7459191
OpenAlexW2936916362

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.